1 I am saying that if there are, then this is where I would see it 



2 happening--as a result of something very low level and long-term. 



3 MR. VILD: That statement of the rate of hydrocarbon accumulation 



4 being low and being substantially offset by breakdown processes is on 



5 25C--I do not know whether that is the only place where it occurs in the 

 5 report. 



7 I just want to make sure it is not something we struck. 



8 DR. GRASSLE: Where? 



9 MR. VILD: It was right in the thing about the gradual increase in 



10 hydrocarbon accumulation--the first full sentence, reading "over the 



11 years can be expected--" I am just quoting from the language here--"but 



12 because the rate is low it may be substantially offset by breakdown 



13 processes." 



14 Did we keep new wording or just strike that out? 



15 DR. VALENTINE: No, it stays in. 



16 DR. GRASSLE: We did strike it, and we are going to put it back 



17 in, okay? 



18 MR. VILD: I am not sure if that is the only place where it occurs 



19 in the report. 



20 DR. GRASSLE: I think it is. We are putting it back in. We did 



21 strike "may be offset by breakdown processes." 



22 DR. KRAEUTER: Is breakdown the correct word? Is it decomposition 



23 or is breakdown a more general term that is acceptable to everybody? 



24 DR. GRASSLE: I can live with either one. 



25 DR. COOPER: To me breakdown is probably more generic. 



26 DR. GRASSLE 



27 DR. BOTHNER 



28 DR. GRASSLE 



Okay, fine. 



Can we read the sentences as they are to read, now? 



If I can get to where we changed it. "Hydrocarbon 



29 accumulations from produced water--" 



30 MR. BOURNE: "Hydrocarbon accumulations in surficial sediments 



31 from produced water--" 



32 DR. GRASSLE: Yes. "--are likely to be undetectable." Even after 



33 a number of years, since accumulations would be substantially offset by 



34 breakdown processes. 



403 



